In all ways he departed from the God who had enriched him with the choicest gifts, and sank through luxury and excess, first into a premature old age,* and then into a death as hopeless, so unrelieved by any sign of penitence or any promise of amendment, that from that day to this rabbis and divines have discussed his final doom, many of them inclining to the darker alternative. This is the Solomon of history. But the Solomon of Ecclesiastes is a sage who conducts moral experiments for the good of the race, in order that with all the weight of manifold experience he may teach men what is that good and right way which alone leads to peace. Now, however hardly we may think of the wise king who was guilty of so many follies, we can hardly think of him as such a fool that he did not know his sins to be sins, or as such a knave that he deliberately endeavoured to palm them on after ages, not as transgressions of the Divine law, but as a series of delicate philosophic experiments which he was kind enough to conduct for the benefit of mankind. Even if we can conceive of him as thus seeking to cloak and palliate his sins, we may be very sure that the book in which he made so shameless an attempt would not have been admitted into the Sacred Canon.

"On the whole, then, we conclude that, in this book, Solomon is taken as the Hebrew type of wisdom-the wisdom which is based on large varied experience; and that his experience is here dramatised for the instruction of a people who from first to last, from the fable of Jotham to the parables of our Lord, were accustomed to receive moral instruction in fictitious and dramatic forms. Its author was not Solomon, but some unnamed Rabbi; it was written, not in the time of Solomon, i.e. about 1,000 в.c., but some five or six centuries later; and it was addressed, not to the free, wealthy, cultured subjects of the wise king, but to their degenerate descendants, when these were enduring the wrongs and oppressions of the Persian captivity.

"As for the form and design of the book there is no question that it sets before us the quest of the Summum Bonum, the search for the chief good. Its main immediate design was to deliver the exiled Jews from the misleading theories of morals current among them, from the sensualism and scepticism caused by their imperfect conceptions of the divine Providence, by showing them that the true good of life is not to be secured by philosophy, by the pursuit of pleasure, by devotion to business, by amassing wealth; but that it results from a temperate enjoyment of the daily gifts of the divine bounty, and a patient endurance of inevitable calamities, combined with the sincere service of God, and a steadfast faith in the future life in which all wrongs will be righted and all problems of providential rule will receive a triumphant solution. Instead of setting forth these truths in a metaphysical treatise, or a moral essay, or even in an authentic biography, our author throws them into a dramatic form. Availing himself of the historical and traditional records of Solomon's life, he depicts him as conducting a series of moral experiments, as testing the claims of wisdom, mirth, affairs, wealth, and as

* Solomon could not have been more than sixty years of age when he died; yet it was not till he was "old" that his wives "turned his heart away from the Lord his God."-1 Kings xi. 4.

finding them all incompetent to satisfy the cravings of the soul; as attaining no rest or peace until he had learned a simple enjoyment of simple pleasures, a patient constancy under heavy trials, a heart-felt devotion to the service of God, and an unwavering faith in that future life whose dark portal men name Death.""*

So much for the authorship of Ecclesiastes, but what of its inspiration? Of course this disproof of the Solomonic origin of the book,-which is to our mind conclusive,-does not necessarily involve any disproof of its inspiration. We do not doubt the inspiration of the Epistle to the Hebrews, because we are pretty sure that it was not written by St. Paul. In the present case, however, we must bear in mind the fact that Ecclesiastes was only admitted into the Jewish Canon on the assumption that it was the genuine work of Solomon, and hence that the disproof of this assumption virtually disproves its right to a place therein. Moreover, even on this assumption, and allowing that it is found in the earliest catalogues which the Jews have transmitted to us of their sacred writings, as Dr. Ginsburg and Professor Plumptre maintain, still it is quite certain that its right to be considered canonical was always more or less questioned among the Jews themselves. Thus we learn from the Talmud that a controversy arose about A.D 65, which turned mainly upon the canonicity of Ecclesiastes, and was not settled till A.D. 90; the great Rabbinical schools of Shammai and Hillel taking as usual opposite sides. "The school of Shammai, who had the majority, opposed; so that the book was probably excluded. (Adoyot, v. 3.) The question emerged again at a later synod at Jahneh or Jamnia, when R. Eleasar ben Asaria was chosen patriarch, and Gamaliel the second deposed. Here it was decided, not unanimously however, but by a majority of Hillelites, that Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs 'pollute the hands,' i.e., belong properly to the Hagiographa. (Yadayim, v. 3.) This was about A.D. 90. Thus the question of the canonicity of certain books was discussed at two synods.

Passages in the Talmud have been adduced to show that the Shammaite objections to the canonicity of Eccclesiastes,' were overruled by the positive declaration from the seventy-two elders, being a testimony anterior to the Christian era, that Coheleth is canonical;' but they do not support the opinion.† 'The sages' referred to in the treatise Sabbat and elsewhere is a vague expression, resting apparently on no historic tradition - a mere opinion of comparatively late date. If it refers to the Jerusalem synod A.D. 65, the Shammaites were simply outnumbered there by the Hillelites. The matter was debated hastily, and determined for the time by a majority. But the synod of Jamnia consisted of seventytwo persons; and a passage in the treatise Yadayim refers to it.‡

* Pp. 7-18.

The

"The sages wished to pronounce Coheleth apocryphal, because its statements are contradictory. And why have they not declared it apocryphal? Because it begins with the words of the law, and ends with the words of the law, for it opens with the words, What advantage has man in all his labour wherewith he labours under the sun?' &c. &c."-Sabbat, 30 b.

"R. Simeon ben Asai said, 'I have received it from the mouth of the seventytwo elders in the day that R. Eleasar ben Asaria was appointed elder, that the Song of Songs and Coheleth pollute the hands."— Yadayim, v. 3.

testimony of the seventy-two elders to whom R. Simeon ben Asai here alludes, so far from belonging to an ante-Christian era, belongs to a date about 90 A.D. And the fact that the synod at Jamnia took up again a question already debated at Jerusalem A.D. 65, proves that no final settlement of the canon had taken place before. The canon was virtually settled at Jamnia, where was confirmed what R. Akiba said of the Canticles in his usual extravagant way; "No day in the whole history of the world is of so much worth as the one in which the Song of Songs was given to Israel; for all the Scriptures are holy; but the Song of Songs is most holy." As the Hagiographa were not read in public, with the exception of Esther, opinions of the Jewish rabbins might still differ about Canticles and Ecclesiastes, even after the synod of Jamnia.'

On these grounds, then, coupled with the facts (1) that the book is never referred to in the New Testament, and (2) that the true character and design of it are among the most difficult of biblical problems, we are, we venture to think, quite warranted in speaking of Ecclesiastes as a book of doubtful inspiration and unknown authorship." If anything can be said to the contrary let it be said.

66

*AN OLD Student.

SCRIPTURE TEACHING CONCERNING THE WICKED.

A PAPER READ AT A QUARTERLY MEETING OF BAPTIST AND INDEPENDENT MINISTERS, HELD IN THE Baptist chapel, ACCRINGTON.

N briefly discussing the profoundly difficult theme which forms the subject of this paper, I shall endeavour to confine myself as rigidly as possible to an analysis of the actual statements of Scripture-avoiding all simply philosophical or metaphysical arguments. I am not going to try to show what it would be most appropriate, most just, or most probable that God should do with the wicked. It is alike beside my purpose and beyond my power to attempt the determination of what God ought to do. I am not even going to affirm what God WILL do; but simply to show what the Scriptures actually declare on the subject. Let us then inquire

I. WHAT IS THE DIRECT TEACHING of Scripture ?

When our first father was placed on his trial in the garden of Eden, the penalty of disobedience to that divine command by which he was forbidden to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was death. "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Theologians have concluded that the death-penalty here denounced was threefold. 1. Natural death-the death of the body. 2. Spiritual death, the alienation of the soul from God. 3. Eternal death; in the sense of everlasting torment in hell; but it is inconceivable that the recorded words of the threatening could have conveyed this three-fold idea to Adam. Taking the language as recorded, it is impossible that the threat of death could be understood by Adam to mean an everlasting life in torment. What would be thought of any human law, which, while denouncing death as the penalty of its transgression, should really intend

* Dr. Samuel Davidson, "The Canon of the Bible," pp. 35-38.

not the taking away of life, but the infliction of unceasing torture? At all events, taking the words as they stand, they could neither suggest such an idea, nor warrant such a conclusion.

The law of Moses contains no positive and unquestionable evidence on the general question of the destiny of the wicked; but there is this significant fact, that Moses when making his final appeal to the Israelites says: "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death-blessing and cursing; therefore, choose life that both thou and thy seed may live." (Deut. xxx. 19.)

The curses which were pronounced upon the Jews in the event of their disobedience were to end in their being destroyed (Deut. xxviii. 20, 21); perishing-being consumed from off the land. The Lord declared that as he had rejoiced over them to do them good, so he would rejoice over them to destroy them, and to bring them to nought, or to exterminate them. (Deut. xxviii. 63.) Now I am fully aware that these penalties were in the main of a temporal character, but then we have to note that during this very important dispensation there was no express hint of any penalty different in its character which was to overtake the transgressor in the world to come-so far as the law could go in the way of suggesting the ultimate issue of sin, death, destruction, perishing was to be its final penalty.

The historical books of the Old Testament may be passed over in this part of our discussion, as also the Book of Job; but the Book of Psalms abounds in evidence concerning the destiny of the wicked: and although it may be said that the light possessed by the writers concerning a future life was very imperfect, it must be borne in mind such light as they did possess was derived from the Holy Ghost; the very spirit of truth. The Holy Ghost spake in David-David wrote in the Spirit (Matt. xxii. 43), a fact abundantly proved by the testimony of Christ and the apostles; such being the case, their light was real if incomplete, and their statements must have been in accordance with the truth-not in antagonism to it. Now the teaching of the Book of Psalms is, that the wicked shall be turned into hell (Psa. ix. 17), sheol, the state of death; that the enemies of God shall perish (Psa. xcii. 9); that while the Lord preserveth the righteous, all the wicked will he destroy (Psa. cxlv. 20); that the end of the wicked is that they shall be cast down into destruction (Psa. lxxiii. 15); utterly consumed with terrors (Psa. lxxiii. 18, 19); that they shall be cut off, and shall not be. (Psa. xxxvii. 9.) The Book of Proverbs persistently represents death as the final issue of sin. Thus wisdom is represented as declaring, "Whoso findeth me, findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the Lord; but he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul; all they that hate me love death." The book of Ecclesiastes, while clearly affirming a future judgment, does not declare what the penalty or penalties inflicted by it will be.

The writings of the prophets in their statements concerning the wicked are mainly occupied with the denunciation of temporal judgments; but there is this characteristic declaration in the first chapter of Isaiah. "The destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the Lord shall be consumed;" while in the writings of Ezekiel we have the clearest possible declaration of the death-penalty as attached to sin, "The soul that sinneth it shall die,"

(Ezek. xviii.) and the most earnest entreaties to turn from that life of sin which must end in death; and hence it is impossible to exclude the idea of that second death which is the ultimate penalty of sin; for the first death is common to all alike: no life of righteousness could secure exemption from it.

We must now turn to the teaching of the New Testament; and here in the Gospels we come upon the statements of him who is the Truth: he through whom God himself speaks, and he who as the judge of all will have the final doom of the wicked in his own hands. What, then, according to Jesus Christ, is the destiny of the wicked? In the strongest possible manner does Christ declare that the impenitent will be subjected to eternal damnation; that they shall go away into everlasting punishment words which so far as language can go, affirm the hopelessness, and the irrevocability of the doom of the wicked; but what the doom itself is has to be discovered by such statements as: "Wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction." (Matt. vii. 13; x. 28.) "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. What shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul ?" or life. (Matt. xvi. 26.) "He that findeth his life shall lose it" (Matt. x. 39), which, with all its parables shows that the loss of life the missing of life eternal, is the threatened penalty; it cannot possibly refer to the loss of life at the first death; because it is the preservation of that present life by unfaithfulness to Christ which is the means of exposure to the loss of life denounced in the text. Perishing is the doom from which Christ represents the sinner as being saved. "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Of his own sheep he says: "I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish. He that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him;" i.e., rejecting Christ, he forfeits the everlasting life, and remains exposed to the curse of death, under which sin has brought him.

According to the teaching of Christ, the death, the perishing, and the destruction are to be inflicted by the agency of fire. (Matt. v. 29.) The whole body raised at the last day is with the soul to be cast into hell fire (Matt. x. 28), where both will be destroyed. That fire is declared to be everlasting; a word which, judged by its use in these passages of Scripture, does not teach that the person or thing exposed to its action is indestructible, but that the fire will burn until the person or thing is destroyed, as in the case of the fire which destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. Other statements of Christ which partake of a metaphorical character will have to be noticed under our next head. Peter when addressing the multitudes in the porch of Solomon's temple, declared that every soul that would not hear Christ, the Prophet like unto Moses, should be destroyed. Paul in the synagogue at Antioch in Pisidia, warned his hearers to beware lest this came upon them according to the writings of the prophets: "Behold ye despisers, and wonder and perish."

The writings of Paul abound in statements concerning the destiny of the wicked. Gentile sinners are declared to pursue their vicious courses while knowing the judgment of God, that they who commit such